BDSM – Am I Abused?

I get kind of frustrated when I read abuse pamphlets. Because the definition of “abuse” is so different within the BDSM community, so many of the things “vanilla”people consider abuse are expressly used in the training of slaves. In particular, in the training of me.

(Somewhere around the blogosphere, there was an article on “vanilla bigotry”, recently. I suppose, in some ways, some of us kinksters are a little hard on those who are less than kinky when it comes to our exasperation with their lack of understanding or desire to understand. But I figure we’re no better or worse about it than any other group of people who are convinced the rest of the world doesn’t “get it”, so it’s okay. Right? Shut up, it is, too. And besides, it’s not like I’m saying vanilla people suck. Just that they have different ideas of what abuse looks like than some of us in M/s relationships.)

And because I’m such a ninny, I’ll occasionally sit twiddling my thumbs in angst, wondering if I’m abused.

Some people would say the sheer fact that I have to think about (Not that I actually have to think about it. I know that, within the bounds of our dynamic, I am not abused.) means that I am involved in an abusive relationship. Personally, I think the me questioning whether or not I’m abused means the people who write these pamphlets are doing a good job of making people aware of what to look for, and they make a damn good case… for someone in a vanilla relationship.

For example, it goes without saying that someone looking to be owned will be drawn to a partner who will exhibit controlling behavior. Quit often, property will beg out of the relationship if the owner isn’t up to the task of controlling them. Not many offer up their submission without the expectation of receiving their partner’s domination in return.

Clothing, makeup, food intake, weight, sleep schedule, job, schooling… If these things are controlled in a vanilla relationship, it’s usually considered abuse. And rightfully so, if there is no consensual power exchange in place. However, these are also things that are often controlled by the owner of a master/slave relationship with the submissive’s consent. Though I’ll be the first to admit, there’s a difference between “dominant” and “domineering”. And the difference can only be defined by the relationship’s dynamic.

The sheer point of owning someone is to possess them. So possessiveness in a master/slave relationship isn’t always a sign of abuse, so much as
ownership.

Isolation is often used in the training of slaves. It has been a major part of my training almost since day one. And one of the hardest to accept. There is no denying that I’m a social butterfly.

Controlling who a slave can converse with, when and how can be used as a way to force the slave’s attention where it should be (on his or her
owner) or a way of controlling the information the slave has access to. Taking away distractions focuses all of the slave’s attention on their
training, their owner, their tasks. It’s believed by some that this will result in a more productive slave.

It’s not always a constant thing. Sometimes, isolation is only used in the beginning. Sometimes the slave is required to earn back the right to converse with family and/or friends, proving they can maintain the level of submission expected of them when they’re allowed distractions. Sometimes, the owner chooses to slowly add to what the slave is able to do outside of their relationship. Sometimes, they’re simply given the right to control their outside friendships and such back.

Expectations, from the outside looking in, can often appear unrealistic or just plain over the top in master/slave relationships. Things like speech and bathroom restrictions and specific ways to act are sometimes considered “too much”. Occasionally, “Be on your best behavior.” sounds like “You must be perfect.” Goals are sometimes set that appear unattainable to those not involved in these kinds of relationships. And sometimes perfection is expected.

Many dominant people have a “Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde” personality. Sometimes Mr. Hyde only comes out during a scene. But there are some dominant people who use keeping their property guessing as a way to be sure their property is always on his or her toes. Others use it for exactly the reason Brit described in her post. Keeping their partner always off balance. Always unsure of where they stand. Some use it as another way to keep their property focused on them.

Threats of violence and intimidation… Well, they just get a masochist’s parts all warm and gooey. They’re not always meant to be intimidating in master/slave relationships. And when they are, it’s usually because the relationship has a corporal punishment dynamic (many do).

M doesn’t just pressure me for sex. He takes it whenever he wants it. (Though, if I’m to be honest, I’d have to say he never has to actually take it from me. I’m more than willing to oblige.) And that’s perfectly permissible within our dynamic. I gave him blanket consent to do whatever he wanted with and to me.

Which raises the question, can M abuse me? Is it even possible? And if so, then what should I, and others like me, be looking for? (Not that he would ever intentionally mistreat me aside from the things he and I enjoy but others consider “mistreatment”.)

I’ve given up my right to a safe word. I’ve given M the right to choose where my limits are, regardless of what they originally were. I gave him the right to do with me and to me whatever he wants.

As a matter of fact, the only right I’ve refused to give up is the right to hold an important position in his life. He hasn’t just taken it from me because a) he agreed to it and b) he has no interest in demoting me. He enjoys having me by his side.

So I suppose, for me, abuse would be being catapulted from that position?
What do you think? And can you see, now, why it’s so difficult to judge?